East Asian welfare regime: obsolete ideal-type or diversified reality

Abstract

The paper asks if East Asian welfare regimes are still productivist and Confucian? And, have they developed public care policies? The literature is split on the first question but (mostly) confirmative on the second. Care has to a large, but insufficient extent, been rolled out in the region. Political science studies tend to conclude that the region has left the old legacies behind and are now welfare states comparable to European states including them either in the conservative type (e.g. Japan), the liberal type (e.g. Korea) or even as a tendency in the Nordic type (e.g. China), while studies focusing on outcomes or causal links tend to suggest that legacies prevail, but there is (nearly) consensus that Confucianism exercises great influence in the whole region.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 56 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.